Because some fields of study
are far more attractive to the outside world than others, differences in salary
levels among divisions (broadly speaking, in favor of the sciences over the
humanities) seem to be inevitable. It makes sense therefore to look at salaries
within the context of each particular department.

At present, these
departmental salary ranges are essentially unchecked (except by reviews
designed to avoid any appearance of bias based on sex, race, or age). The “free
market” argument, emphasizing the beauties of unbridled capitalism, is often
used to justify such uncontrolled salary ranges. But markets in academia at the
high end are conspicuously un-free in any case, since tenured professors,
unlike corporate employees, cannot be fired or demoted at will.

The crux of the problem,
however, is that significant salary increases come almost entirely through
outside offers, so that people with strong local commitments who cannot
maintain the requisite “have gun will travel” stance have no other means of
demonstrating any kind of “merit” that makes a real difference in their salary
level. The present system, in short, gives people strong incentives to be
poised to leave the university at any moment. It rewards them for focusing only
on their own career prospects, and punishes them for committing themselves
seriously to staying at Columbia and devoting time and energy to the welfare of
the university as a whole.

Because of the intense
secrecy that surrounds faculty salary ranges at Columbia, we do not know how
great the spread of senior faculty salaries is within each department. Yet
without this information, we cannot discuss the problem intelligently—or even
decide whether there is a problem. In the accompanying resolutions, we request
the minimum necessary information, in a manner carefully framed to preserve
salary confidentiality.

FACULTY SALARY RANGES AT THE
LOW END

Use of non-tenurable “other
ranks” of instructors is widespread within the university, and is likely to
increase further. Language Lecturers are employed by a number of departments to
organize and teach language courses, at elementary and intermediate and
sometimes advanced levels. Many Language Lecturers also work with graduate
students. Most have Ph.D. degrees. Many publish academic articles and books;
most attend conferences and prepare teaching materials. All have course loads
heavier than those of professors in their departments. While they are just
beginning to be offered a few perks, compared to their professorial colleagues
they are treated as second-class citizens in every way.

Salary ranges for Language
Lecturers are at present extremely low, mostly in the $30-40 thousand range
(and often in the lower half of even that range). Obviously, these salaries
need to be raised especially since opportunities for promotion are very
limited, so that Lecturers often remain at these salary levels for many years.
We understand that some improvements are starting to be made in these salary
levels, and of course we applaud this news.

Within each department, we
would like to see how far below Assistant Professor levels the Language
Lecturer salaries are at present. Accordingly, we are asking for the minimum
necessary information to be able to make such comparisons, and thus to
understand the situation more clearly and see what might best be done to
improve it.

After the requested data are
obtained, the Faculty Affairs Committee should begin by looking first at the
departments with the most skewed ratios, and seeking to learn what factors are
involved in these ratios, and what measures (if any) need to be taken to
improve the situation. Information of this kind should also be made available
to departmental review committees in the course of their normal work.

We would like to start by
looking at the Language Lecturer salaries, and then use this information to
explore other salary issues around the university.